Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  

Cygwin being uncooperative

Recommended Posts


Been a while since I compiled Chocolate Doom (I've done it easily before), figured I'd try again. I tried to compile it with an existing installation of Cygwin (though unused for a long time) and I got all the (available) necessary packages. It was giving me these errors so I reinstalled Cygwin itself and couldn't get any different results.

In the Cygwin installation menu, I am unable to find any package titled just "gcc", it's all some variation of the name. I would assume that it's either that the plain GCC package is deprecated or that it should automatically be included if this version of the GCC compiler is so vital (which a compiler kinda is vital when compiling stuff).

I've never come across this before in the entire time I've used Cygwin. I am a crappy coder but I can at least find my way once the thing actually compiles. How do I force Cygwin to install packages it needs even if not available from the menu?

I certainly have some compiler available, why not a version that produces Windows binaries (I kinda thought that was the point of Cygwin, to provide a Unix-like dev environment under Windows)?

Share this post

Link to post

That's been a problem for awhile now. I used to get around this by using a script cygwin provided that would switch to gcc-3. Neither the script, nor gcc-3 seem to be a part of cygwin anymore. I still have an old version of cygwin from 2012 that might work, but the archive is 4.55 gigs.

MinGW can compile using the build-chocolate-doom script with a few modifications to said script.

Share this post

Link to post

I was able to compile Chocolate-Doom/Hexen in cygwin earlier this year with an older install of cygwin, that supported mingw-gcc, that I had saved from a few years ago.
There are a few legacy cygwin repositories on the net still, but I haven't had any luck when I tried to use one. Perhaps your luck would be better.

Share this post

Link to post

I'd rather jury rig a build system to work with pure gcc without cygwin, rather than install that fucked up travesty on my windoze, let alone make any of my projects depend on it. As if it is SOOOO hard to find substitutes or workarounds for the almighty command line toolz that oooooooonly *nix provides, or to craft makefiles to work dual-platform.

Share this post

Link to post

I'm sorry you're having problems with Cygwin. It's truly a pain when it doesn't work as it's supposed to. I also can't give a definite answer to make it work as expected. Unfortunately the best tip I can give is this link: http://horstmann.com/articles/cygwin-tips.html.

I don't use Windows hardly and prefer Linux for my own reasons. I use Slackware since it puts me into the guts of Linux (and everything else with it) from the start (it starts into the framebuffer terminal); and I don't have to stay there either. You have to learn that, "Oh, I have to type 'startx' to get into a window environment". Then you start learning how everything else works: scripts (equivalent of .bat files in DOS-Windows but more cool :) ), C code, kernel tree, command line, etc. It's a very simple OS, and makes everything else Linux appear as simple as it really is (other Linux distros use custom package managers and stuff that complicate things for me; I like making my own packages with good ol' classic scripts :) ). It only lets me down when I make a mistake or get tired. I can tear it apart and put back together without a package manager getting in the way (I've downgraded glibc for instance but it wasn't straight forward). If you ever want to install Linux don't forget what I told you about Slackware hehe :) .


Sodaholic said:I am a crappy coder

We're all just as crappy. Okay maybe some are more eviler than others...?

Oh yeah and actually Slackware may not be your best bet for learning. Maybe try Arch or Gentoo Linux. Those are great!

Share this post

Link to post

Thanks for the responses, everyone. I'll contact Fraggle to ask about possibly updating the wiki page to contain a work-around.

Randy87 said:

I still have an old version of cygwin from 2012 that might work, but the archive is 4.55 gigs.

That's pretty big. Is that before or after compression? If it's not too much of a hassle, can you please upload it?

Share this post

Link to post

It is max 7z compressed. I'll look around and see if I can find a file host for it, maybe google drive or something. I believe it contains every or about every cygwin package available at that time. I may be able to trim it down to just the requirements if you prefer that.

You might want to consider a MinGW compilation. Cygwin uses a form of MinGW anyway. The build script can be modified, or you can just compile the deps and chocolate-doom separately. Code-blocks also uses MinGW, and I assume it is still an option for compiling Chocolate-Doom.

Another possible option is cross-compiling from linux. I don't think the build script directly supports this, but you can probably just override the compiler env var.

I successfully built Chocolate-Doom using MinGW in Windows 7 x64 after your original post, though I did have to replace the SDL DLLs with pre-built ones.

Finally, Visual Studio may be an option. I'm not sure I've ever tried it myself, but I think there is a project file for it.

Share this post

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this